NoC versus SoC issue. Let's set the facts straight, once and for all.

I',m an architect and a building professional. What's your field of expertise that would give you a better understanding of those crashes into
those buildings?

It's obvious there are people here who will vehemently deny there's anything but the officially flawed explanation by NIST. Participants or paid
shills? One must wonder.

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by Bilk22
I don't know much about that crash, but there are two things to consider here. First, regarding the 1771 crash, does it make sense that a guy would
write a suicide note fully knowing that the craft is going to probably burn during the crash? Wouldn't he expect the note to burn too?

Second, this crash has nothing in common with the 911 crashes. This plane was reported to have fallen from 30,000ft and impacted solid earth. The
911 planes flew into structures which are thin skins with volumes of vacant space behind them. Isn't that an OS claim as to why the planes
penetrated into the structures so readily? Why the "disappeared" as if there were no structure there at all? Now we're told to believe something
very different than that.

Wait... what??? Here is what you said:

Have any other examples of commercial crashes with no large hull or wing parts laying around? I'd be interested in seeing them.

I responded with the crash of flight 1771. You got your answer, I would appreciate a sincere thank you, not you moving the goal posts.

Your post proves your ignorance of the structures that the planes hit and your ignorance of physics. You asked for proof of another crash with no
large hull or wings laying around...you got one. Now run along.

Then you sould educate yourself before making declarations like. " it is impossible that a passport can survive those plane crashes".

Cuz there are many similarities between this one (and others) that, once you educate yourself, just might do something about your personal incredulity
over such matters.

First, regarding the 1771 crash, does it make sense that a guy would write a suicide note fully knowing that the craft is going to probably
burn during the crash? Wouldn't he expect the note to burn too?

Who knows what he thought. Ridiculous question.

But the fact remains that the suicide note survived, proving that it can happen.

Second, this crash has nothing in common with the 911 crashes. This plane was reported to have fallen from 30,000ft and impacted solid
earth

Ummmm, Shanksville?

The 911 planes flew into structures which are thin skins with volumes of vacant space behind them. Isn't that an OS claim as to why the planes
penetrated into the structures so readily? Why the "disappeared" as if there were no structure there at all? Now we're told to believe something
very different than that.

We give these examples in an effort to educate you.

Plane flies into the ground at a very high speed, and disintegrates. small parts are what is found afterwards. A suicide note if found. No bodies are
found, only body parts.

This is almost exactly what can be found in witness testimony after the Shanksville crash.

It is then not a far reach to then understand that when planes fly into structures, a similar result would be expected - small pieces, body parts
only, etc...

And no planes disappeared into the WTCs. They broke apart the ext columns AND broke around around them, and the plane pieces flowed through the
windows.

Sonny, maybe you should acquire an education before attempting to educate others. I'm 52. I've worked in my field for 27 years - probably longer
than you've been alive. I live in NYC and have worked on highrise structures including the Empire State Building. I've effected may and varied
repairs to these structures and fully understand the load bearing capabilities of structures and strength in materials.

To further engage the likes of you and others here, whose sole purpose is to continue disseminating false information, is pointless on my part and
I'm man enough to admit it. So you and the others can post what you will in response to my contributions here, but you won't be getting a response
from me. I'll only respond to reasonable people with no clear agenda. If that makes you happy, so be it. Have a wonderful day my friend.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by Bilk22
I don't know much about that crash

Then you sould educate yourself before making declarations like. " it is impossible that a passport can survive those plane crashes".

Cuz there are many similarities between this one (and others) that, once you educate yourself, just might do something about your personal incredulity
over such matters.

First, regarding the 1771 crash, does it make sense that a guy would write a suicide note fully knowing that the craft is going to probably
burn during the crash? Wouldn't he expect the note to burn too?

Who knows what he thought. Ridiculous question.

But the fact remains that the suicide note survived, proving that it can happen.

Second, this crash has nothing in common with the 911 crashes. This plane was reported to have fallen from 30,000ft and impacted solid
earth

Ummmm, Shanksville?

The 911 planes flew into structures which are thin skins with volumes of vacant space behind them. Isn't that an OS claim as to why the
planes penetrated into the structures so readily? Why the "disappeared" as if there were no structure there at all? Now we're told to believe
something very different than that.

We give these examples in an effort to educate you.

Plane flies into the ground at a very high speed, and disintegrates. small parts are what is found afterwards. A suicide note if found. No bodies are
found, only body parts.

This is almost exactly what can be found in witness testimony after the Shanksville crash.

It is then not a far reach to then understand that when planes fly into structures, a similar result would be expected - small pieces, body parts
only, etc...

And no planes disappeared into the WTCs. They broke apart the ext columns AND broke around around them, and the plane pieces flowed through the
windows.

It is then not a far reach to then understand that when planes fly into structures, a similar result would be expected - small pieces, body parts
only, etc...

It should be added here that the parts are indeed small and I would not so much term the typical human remains as parts, but more like small pieces
which frequently can not be even be identified as to exactly what part it is or where it came from.

Yet, unusual items do survive. I walked through the field of debris at one (USAF Fighter) that impacted mother earth at a rather flat angle, but at
very high speed. I picked up small pieces of two people the largest of which was a jawbone. Yet, in all of this debris a helmet visor survived
virtually intact (only a small chip on the edge was missing.) The lettering on the visor cover was unscathed and unburned.

Originally posted by Bilk22
What makes you an expert on them?

While I don't classify myself as an expert, I have walked through more than one debris field of actual crashes, some similar and some not to the
crashes on 9/11. I am assure you tho' that there was nothing at all mysterious or suspect about the 9/11 crashes. They were what they should have
been, chaotic crashes with mostly small parts remaining, but some unusual items surviving unscathed.

You, sir, have no clue and refuse to educate yourself constituting nothing, but a troll that you were previously called on earlier...

If you think anyone is disseminating false information, you need to prove that is so as opposed to making bare assertions that have no basis in
fact.

You ought to perhaps stick to whatever it is you do regarding buildings and avoid discussing aircraft crashes. You are a miserable failure at
expressing anything other than personal incredulity regarding those solely based on your profound ignorance.

Originally posted by Bilk22And this makes you an expert on aircraft crashes how exactly?

It doesn't, but then again I don't make asinine statements about them like you just did.

I am a process control engineer with a concentration in metrology (measurement systems) and statistical analysis. But I also have a background of
working with eyewitnesses and video forensics from my previous law enforcement career. So I try to focus on areas where my skill set/experience
qualifies me to comment.

When I want to know something about aircraft crashes, I seek out an experienced crash investigator. Should I need to know something about aviation, I
seek out experienced pilots. If I need to know something about air traffic control, I seek out air traffic controllers. If I need to build a house,
then I'll seek out an architect.

You'll note that I refrain from commenting on the WTC building collapse or the damage at the Pentagon. I may give my layman opinion sometimes, but I
always qualify it as just that, my layman opinion. I have an extensive background in mathematics and physics, along with one strength of materials
class a very long time ago. But structural engineering is a very specialized field with nuances outside my experience set. Perhaps you should do the
same when it comes to aircraft crashes.

Originally posted by Bilk22
I',m an architect and a building professional. What's your field of expertise that would give you a better understanding of those crashes into those
buildings?

It's obvious there are people here who will vehemently deny there's anything but the officially flawed explanation by NIST. Participants or paid
shills? One must wonder.

I'm pretty old too...not as old as you, but I too need reading glasses. I suggest you place yours on and re-read the post you made:

Have any other examples of commercial crashes with no large hull or wing parts laying around? I'd be interested in seeing them.

You were shown one. Can you or can you not comprehend what information I gave you? Were there any large plane parts recovered from flight 1771? The
answer is no. Your response was another anti- NIST rant that is quite popular around here. Your claim to be an architect means nothing to me. Box Boy
Dick Gage is an architect and he is clueless.

I'm curious though, Mr. Architect / Truther, what should happen to a plane traveling at 237 meters per second when it collides with a massive solid
structure? (flight 77)

9/11 Conspiracies: This forum is dedicated to the discussion and speculation of cover-ups, scandals, and other conspiracies surrounding the
events of 9/11/2001. Participants should be aware that this forum is under close staff scrutiny due to general rudeness by some. Discussion
topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to
refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.

Any new visitor reading that row of acidic character assassinations of the posters above, will instantly decide to avoid this forum, since there seems
no close staff scrutiny at all anymore at this forum.

Further on, what the hell has the WTC subject to do with the title of my thread?
They are all off-topic posts.

I have giving up notifying staff here, since not one time did it result in correcting the crude or off-topic poster(s), but always in removing my
posts, or even temporary bans for me.
I have learned to live with it.
Those readers focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals; should too.

These are 22 phone interviews Jeff Hill did with Pentagon 9/11 witnesses.
I am a member on his forum. I can not access the single interviews anymore, since today.
In this link to the www.911oz.com forum that I posted a few days before, was a working audio interview with Vin Narayanan, it is now without sound
:

Tell me Jeff, am I a thread to you ? Is that the reason you blocked me from accessing this link to Penny Elgas her phone interview? Is it for my remark, that both of you in the Penny Elgas phone interview, avoided as the Plague, to let Penny tell her exact position
on Route 27.....????

I have only one question to my readers :
Please try the above PumpItOut forum links, and report back here if YOU can listen to their audio. If you can, then this is an action on my person
only.
Make your own conclusions about such behavior.

Digging through your jumbled mess of walls of text is almost more than I can stomach this morning. However, I do have some questions that I can't
resolve. Why do you classify two helicopter pilots who attempted to replicate the flight path after the event as "witnesses"? Witnesses to what?
How does a SMALL Office building suddenly turn into a LARGE Office Building such as the Navy Annex? Your interpretation of what was being referred to
as a small office building seems predicated on your interpretation of a couple of pronouns. How do you know a helicopter you think you've found in a
photo (I don't see it) is the same as the one flown by the two pilots being interviewed? Your Title and OP indicates this is a thread to establish
facts. We're up to 8 pages now and I don't see any facts you've established yet. All I see from you is a continuation of a jumbled up mess
constituting walls of text full of errors same as all of your previous stuff. How long do we have to wait to see some facts from you?

I wrote that that SMALL office building was southwest and less than a mile from the Pentagon, these two pilots said.
Which the two pilots however did not specify for its exact position, they only said it was located south west of the Pentagon (which the Navy Annex is
not) and a little-bit less than one mile away from the Pentagon.
Could they mean the Paik brothers garage?
No, that's 0.73 Miles from the impact point. At a heading of 247.18°. South-southwest.

There is however a small office building at 1.02 Miles from impact. Which is 0.36 Miles south-southwest from the Navy Annex its first Wing building.
The line from that small office building to the impact point goes STRAIGHT over the center of the 8 Annex Wings.

There's also another small office building just east of the above one, at 0.99 Miles in a straight line over the center of the 8 Annex Wings to the
impact point, and on a 250.70° south-southwest heading. Just as the other small office building just south-southwest of it I described above.
Which is 0.33 Miles west from the Navy Annex its first Wing building.

It's clear to anybody, the two pilots were not describing the Navy Annex, Reheat.

Digging through your jumbled mess of walls of text is almost more than I can stomach this morning. However, I do have some questions that I can't
resolve. Why do you classify two helicopter pilots who attempted to replicate the flight path after the event as "witnesses"? Witnesses to what? How
does a SMALL Office building suddenly turn into a LARGE Office Building such as the Navy Annex? Your interpretation of what was being referred to as a
small office building seems predicated on your interpretation of a couple of pronouns. How do you know a helicopter you think you've found in a photo
(I don't see it) is the same as the one flown by the two pilots being interviewed? Your Title and OP indicates this is a thread to establish facts.
We're up to 8 pages now and I don't see any facts you've established yet. All I see from you is a continuation of a jumbled up mess constituting
walls of text full of errors same as all of your previous stuff. How long do we have to wait to see some facts from you?

Your first question is resolved by me above.

""How do you know a helicopter you think you've found in a photo (I don't see it) is the same as the one flown by the two pilots being
interviewed? ""

Because I told you in the post you reacted on, that we all, HAVE the pilot on two 9/11 photos, huge HiRes ones, in front of his Fairfax County Police
helicopter, parked on the spot on the grass where I gave you a detailed description from. It's easy to find in the Google Photos repository.
The photo I posted and where you can't find the Heli, I can show it easily to you, but please, don't play dumb, it is easy to spot, with its rotor
blades and all, its small but obvious. Go look up the hi-res one.

This one cracks me up :

We're up to 8 pages now and I don't see any facts you've established yet. All I see from you is a continuation of a jumbled up mess constituting
walls of text full of errors same as all of your previous stuff. How long do we have to wait to see some facts from you?

I am the one being helpful for 9/11 interested readers. You not, you do not assist, you resist truly investigative research, which can lead to erratic
conclusions, which are being corrected, as it should.

I am the one correcting myself, since you did not come up with the evidence to PROVE me wrong, I did that MYSELF. Self-correction, to get to the true
facts.
And I am still not convinced that everything fits. The GE 07-09-2001 west wall definitely doesn't look the same as the ASCE report drawing.
Which could lead to an incorrect placement by me of the impact point at column 14, which I based on the ASCE drawing, being at a space between columns
13 and14 or perhaps even 15, counted from the entrance to the corridor to the right of these 07-09-01 Google Earth 3D Map windows.

And if the impact point I arrived at, should be shifted more to the right (south), we are back again to AA 77 on a different attack path with its
belly over the trailer again.

Well I confess that it has been a few years since I read the entire statement. But since I've spoken with the pilots personally, I really don't feel
the need to go back over their CMH statement. Yes, since you know who I am, you also know that I have been to Arlington, I have listened to the 911
tapes, I have listened to the police and fire audios, I have interviewed many of the police officers who responded or otherwise saw the plane,
helicopter pilots, Sheraton hotel employees, people who live and work in the area, the guy who did this particular interview, visited the Army Center
of Military History (brushed off a US Senator for that visit, I think he is still mad at me for that one) and on-and-on I could go. And no, you cannot
have anyone's name and number, because they don't need people like you calling them up with this kind of foolishness. CIT kinda put an end to
that.

So if you want to parse their words and twist them to fit your delusion, go ahead. Doesn't bother me any. But when you get done, come back and look
at that picture again. That is the flight path they reconstructed and he took the picture (along with a number of others that I also have) to document
it for his personal collection.

Originally posted by LaBTopI am the one being helpful for 9/11 interested readers. You not, you do not assist, you resist truly
investigative research, which can lead to erratic conclusions, which are being corrected, as it should.

.

It is going to be awhile before I can stop laughing long enough to respond to that one.

Okay, I feel much better now. I've decided I'm going to be a nice guy this morning and help you out a little. But my advice to you is leave these
people (eyewitnesses) alone. That is what makes everyone so angry. There is NO DOUBT what flight path the plane took. That is not just me, that is
major leader of 911 Truth. Dr. Frank Legge, Warren Stutt and I have already done this research and quite frankly, we are tired of talking about it.

If you simply want to verify it using your drawings and GE analysis, then no one really objects. However, when you guys start maligning eyewitnesses,
then we do. These people did nothing but have perhaps the worst day in their life, an you guys are treating them like criminals, liars and traitors.
That reflects on everyone involved in the the 911 Truth Movement. The years, the money and the resources that have gone into debating this nonsense
could have gone into better pursuits. History Commons is about to go under because everyone wants to use it as a resource, but no one chips in to help
pay for the bandwidth to keep it online. The same story with resources like the 911 Document Archive and 911 Datasets. All of my work is archived at
those two places and at the Arlington County Public Library. If those resources are to remain around for people to use, then people need to stop
arguing over silly things like NoC on internet forums and get involved making a real difference by helping keep those resources alive.

But just in case you are interested in doing serious research, then I scanned some contacts cards for you. Now I don't know if each of these folks are
still in their positions, but if not, then their successors would be just as ready to assist. It has been 11 years now, and memories are faded or
corrupted, but if you feel like making a road trip and spending some time talking to people, then it would be worth your while to take a walk down
Columbia Pike.

Might I suggest stopping by the Nigerian restaurant a few doors down from A-One Auto next to the Annex? I don't recall the name of the place, but it
is a goldmine for information. I must warn you that it is an almost exclusively Muslim clientele, so they may look at you funny when you walk in. But,
it is a hangout for many of the local cab drivers. These guys are plugged into EVERYTHING. You would be amazed at the stuff they overhear on cell
phone conversations, etc.

You might want to try this for lunch. I really have no idea what the name of it was, but it sure was tasty. And don't be stupid like me and ask for a
fork. Turns out you eat it with the bread it is served on by hand. But, how was I supposed to know? I'm not from Nigeria

Whoops, my bad, it is an Ethiopian restaurant, not Nigerian. I told you it has been awhile.

While you are there, take a hop over to Falls Church and the Dar Al-Hijrah Mosque (the infamous "terror mosque").
That is where Anwar al-Awlaki was an Imam and where Hani Hanjour, Khalid al- Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi hung out. It is kinda hard to find because it
is completely surrounded by high shrubs and trees. Sorry, don't recall the name of the street it is on, but it is right down the road from Bailey's
Crossroads, VA. The entrance is off from a side street and kinda hidden. I took that picture in 2010, so not sure if it still looks like that from the
road or not. They might look at you kinda funny at first, but you might get lucky and find out a little more about the hijackers from those who
actually met them.

No, I'm not going to tell you who this is, but it ain't the Paik boys. He saw the plane a mile or two out on its final approach, but I've only
uploaded the part I still have questions about. Maybe you can finally resolve it for us. Shiki Paik drew a diagram of the bent antenna for me and
Google Earth imagery did indeed verify that a crane was parked next to the tower on 9/13, but the VDOT denies any antenna was bent or work done. Very
odd.

"I am the one being helpful for 9/11 interested readers. You not, you do not assist, you resist truly investigative research, which can lead to
erratic conclusions, which are being corrected, as it should."

Investigative research?

This one is funny too....

"I am the one correcting myself, since you did not come up with the evidence to PROVE me wrong, I did that MYSELF. Self-correction, to get to the true
facts."

Labtop, I don't bother with most of your stuff. It's not worth the effort and I really don't need to anyway just in case you are wondering why I
don't always reply. You wouldn't recognize a "fact" if it bit you in the ass. You prove that over and over again in virtually every post you
make.

Also, that you've been denied access (or can't access due to your own ineptitude) to those files on Hill's site has kept me amused all morning... If
you had a clue, you'd be dangerous. As it is you're mostly harmless.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.